Café Co Case Study Part I
Question 1:
Applying your knowledge of academic models of HRM (for example HRM/PM; Hard and Soft HRM or the Guest or Harvard model) explain the main similarities and differences between the approaches to people management at Café Co before and after the review.
Soft HRM related to the Harvard Model by Beer (1984) is focusing on increasing performance of employees by enhancing competencies and commitment towards the company and its overall business goals (Bloisi, 2007). Whereas in Soft HRM achieving a competitive advantage and cost-effective HRM are possible by focusing on sustainable training, development, motivation and involvement of employees (Storey, 2007), Hard HRM gains these effects by replacing the workforce of a company, which therefore acts as a rational factor of production like capital or resources to an organization (Legge, 1995).
Hard HRM with regards to the Michigan Model by Fombrun (1984) “views people as a resource used as a means of achieving organizational goals” (Bloisi, 2007:14). This embraces the idea of a free market with respect to cost-cutting effects regarding full utilization of human resources by employing and deploying (Bloisi, 2007).
Previously Café Co was characterized by a rather hard HRM due to high employee turnover, minimum wages based on legislative requirements and mostly short-term contracts which led to low motivation amongst the remaining staff. In order to improve the quality of employees, Café Co was keen on performance management whilst communication as well as employee engagement have been neglected. Furthermore HR department, responsible for recruiting people, often employed inappropriate workers.
The new HR approach was based on soft HRM trying to increase employers’ commitment to the company goals and values by establishing higher wages for baristas, better internal communication or learning and development. HR directors are now part of the board and HR policies have been integrated into the business goals.
Applying your knowledge of academic models of HRM (for example HRM/PM; Hard and Soft HRM or the Guest or Harvard model) explain the main similarities and differences between the approaches to people management at Café Co before and after the review.
Soft HRM related to the Harvard Model by Beer (1984) is focusing on increasing performance of employees by enhancing competencies and commitment towards the company and its overall business goals (Bloisi, 2007). Whereas in Soft HRM achieving a competitive advantage and cost-effective HRM are possible by focusing on sustainable training, development, motivation and involvement of employees (Storey, 2007), Hard HRM gains these effects by replacing the workforce of a company, which therefore acts as a rational factor of production like capital or resources to an organization (Legge, 1995).
Hard HRM with regards to the Michigan Model by Fombrun (1984) “views people as a resource used as a means of achieving organizational goals” (Bloisi, 2007:14). This embraces the idea of a free market with respect to cost-cutting effects regarding full utilization of human resources by employing and deploying (Bloisi, 2007).
Previously Café Co was characterized by a rather hard HRM due to high employee turnover, minimum wages based on legislative requirements and mostly short-term contracts which led to low motivation amongst the remaining staff. In order to improve the quality of employees, Café Co was keen on performance management whilst communication as well as employee engagement have been neglected. Furthermore HR department, responsible for recruiting people, often employed inappropriate workers.
The new HR approach was based on soft HRM trying to increase employers’ commitment to the company goals and values by establishing higher wages for baristas, better internal communication or learning and development. HR directors are now part of the board and HR policies have been integrated into the business goals.